Justice BV Nagarathna Defends 3‑Year Bar Practice Requirement and Calls for Greater Women Representation in Judicial Services

Supreme Court Justice <strong>BV Nagarathna</strong> defended the Supreme Court’s mandate of a three‑year practice period for entry into the judicial service, arguing that courtroom exposure is essential for competent judges and for gender‑balanced representation. She also highlighted the need for greater women representation among Government Law Officers and cautioned against over‑reliance on AI for legal drafting, underscoring implications for UPSC aspirants studying judicial reforms and gender equity in the legal system.

Overview During a lecture at CNLU , Justice BV Nagarathna responded to queries on the Supreme Court’s recent directive that candidates must have at least three years of practice at the Bar before appearing for the judicial service examination. She argued that practical litigation experience is indispensable for competent judges and for enhancing women’s participation in the judiciary. Key Developments Justice Nagarathna refuted the view that the three‑year requirement would deter women aspirants, emphasizing that real‑world courtroom exposure builds the maturity needed for adjudication. She noted that even three years may be insufficient, but the requirement aims to strengthen the justice delivery system with experienced judges. Addressed the “ Master of the Roster ” convention, stating that the Chief Justice’s role ends once a case is assigned. Highlighted the dual‑role burden on women lawyers and urged a minimum 30 % quota for women GLOs at centre, state and public‑sector bodies. Warned against excessive reliance on artificial‑intelligence tools for drafting pleadings. Important Facts • The Supreme Court’s judgment mandates three years of Bar practice for entry into the judicial service. • Justice Nagarathna, with 40 years of legal experience, stresses that learning continues well beyond this period. • She cited the need for judges to be at least 45 years old for High Court postings, linking age with maturity. • Citing the POCSO framework, she warned against inexperienced judges handing down severe penalties without adequate exposure. UPSC Relevance 1. Supreme Court judgments shape judicial recruitment policies, a frequent topic in GS‑2 (Polity). 2. The discussion on gender equity in the legal profession aligns with GS‑4 (Ethics) and GS‑1 (Social Justice) themes on women’s empowerment. 3. Understanding the “Master of the Roster” concept helps aspirants grasp judicial independence and case‑allocation mechanisms, relevant for questions on the functioning of the judiciary. 4. The call for a 30 % women quota among GLOs ties into policy‑making and affirmative‑action debates. Way Forward Law schools should integrate mandatory internships or moot‑court programs to simulate the three‑year practice experience. Policy makers could consider a phased increase in the required practice period, coupled with mentorship schemes for women lawyers. Institutions must promote gender‑friendly work environments, such as flexible timings and childcare support, to retain women in the legal profession. Future judges should balance traditional legal research with judicious use of AI, ensuring ethical standards in pleadings. Justice Nagarathna’s remarks underscore the importance of experiential learning, gender inclusivity, and judicial independence—core issues for UPSC aspirants preparing for GS‑2 and GS‑4.

<h2>Overview</h2> <p>During a lecture at <span class="key-term" data-definition="Chanakya National Law University (CNLU) – A premier law university in Patna, often hosting judicial and policy discussions (GS2: Polity)">CNLU</span>, <strong>Justice BV Nagarathna</strong> responded to queries on the Supreme Court’s recent directive that candidates must have at least three years of practice at the Bar before appearing for the judicial service examination. She argued that practical litigation experience is indispensable for competent judges and for enhancing women’s participation in the judiciary.</p> <h3>Key Developments</h3> <ul> <li>Justice Nagarathna refuted the view that the three‑year requirement would deter women aspirants, emphasizing that real‑world courtroom exposure builds the maturity needed for adjudication.</li> <li>She noted that even three years may be insufficient, but the requirement aims to strengthen the justice delivery system with experienced judges.</li> <li>Addressed the “<span class="key-term" data-definition="Master of the Roster – The senior judge (usually the Chief Justice) who allocates cases to benches; after allocation, the Chief Justice has no further say (GS2: Polity)">Master of the Roster</span>” convention, stating that the Chief Justice’s role ends once a case is assigned.</li> <li>Highlighted the dual‑role burden on women lawyers and urged a minimum <strong>30 % quota</strong> for women <span class="key-term" data-definition="Government Law Officer (GLO) – A legal officer appointed by the government to represent it in courts and provide legal advice (GS2: Polity)">GLOs</span> at centre, state and public‑sector bodies.</li> <li>Warned against excessive reliance on artificial‑intelligence tools for drafting pleadings.</li> </ul> <h3>Important Facts</h3> <p>• The Supreme Court’s judgment mandates <strong>three years</strong> of Bar practice for entry into the judicial service.<br> • Justice Nagarathna, with <strong>40 years</strong> of legal experience, stresses that learning continues well beyond this period.<br> • She cited the need for judges to be at least <strong>45 years old</strong> for High Court postings, linking age with maturity.<br> • Citing the <span class="key-term" data-definition="POCSO Act – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, a law safeguarding children against sexual crimes (GS1: Social Justice)">POCSO</span> framework, she warned against inexperienced judges handing down severe penalties without adequate exposure.</p> <h3>UPSC Relevance</h3> <p>1. <span class="key-term" data-definition="Supreme Court – India’s apex judicial body that interprets the Constitution and safeguards fundamental rights (GS2: Polity)">Supreme Court</span> judgments shape judicial recruitment policies, a frequent topic in GS‑2 (Polity).<br> 2. The discussion on gender equity in the legal profession aligns with GS‑4 (Ethics) and GS‑1 (Social Justice) themes on women’s empowerment.<br> 3. Understanding the “Master of the Roster” concept helps aspirants grasp judicial independence and case‑allocation mechanisms, relevant for questions on the functioning of the judiciary.<br> 4. The call for a 30 % women quota among <span class="key-term" data-definition="Government Law Officer – Legal officers representing the government in courts, crucial for policy implementation and legal advice (GS2: Polity)">GLOs</span> ties into policy‑making and affirmative‑action debates.</p> <h3>Way Forward</h3> <ul> <li>Law schools should integrate mandatory internships or moot‑court programs to simulate the three‑year practice experience.</li> <li>Policy makers could consider a phased increase in the required practice period, coupled with mentorship schemes for women lawyers.</li> <li>Institutions must promote gender‑friendly work environments, such as flexible timings and childcare support, to retain women in the legal profession.</li> <li>Future judges should balance traditional legal research with judicious use of AI, ensuring ethical standards in pleadings.</li> </ul> <p>Justice Nagarathna’s remarks underscore the importance of experiential learning, gender inclusivity, and judicial independence—core issues for UPSC aspirants preparing for GS‑2 and GS‑4.</p>

Key Facts

Background & Context

UPSC Syllabus Connections

Mains Answer Angle

Full Article

Practice Questions

Prelims MCQ

Mains Short Answer

Mains Essay